The Design of a Collaborative Learning Environment in a Mobile Technology Supported Classroom, Concept of

Fraction Equivalence

Sui Cheung KONGDepartment of Mathematics, Science, Social Science & Technology, The Hong Kong Institute of Ed

ucation, HnogKong

ICCE2006

1. Introduction

• Collaborative learning is good for learners to develop knowledge and interpersonal communication skills. However, 2 obstacles, decrease the effectiveness of the learning process (Roschelle, 2003):

(1) problems in class control during the active participation of learners ; (2) the unsatisfactory participation of particular quiet learners.

• Mobile learning, an emergent learning approach, can address these two obstacles of collaborative learning.

• Mobile learning can assist collaborative activities across space and time, and can be used in traditional classrooms across topics and technologies.

1. Introduction

• There are three attributes of existing mobile technologies: (1) The visualizationThe visualization capability of mobile devices enables lea

rners to distribute cognitive loading to visualization tools. Learners are thus able to engage in activities for deep learning of subject matter that requires visualization support (Roschelle & Pea, 2002).

(2) Most mobile devices are compatible with desktop computers.

(3) The anonymityThe anonymity in the communication with the use of mobile devices helps to increase the participation of learners in collaborative learning activities by allowing them to express their ideas without revealing their identities to the class.

2. Cognitive Conflict

• Mathematical ideas often involves the restructuring of mathematical schema of learners.

• Cognitive conflict is a part of the psychological theories of cognitive change. It involves an inferred state of incompatibility between two inferred component states within the cognitive process (Cantor, 1983). Ex: X->Y; Y->X.

2. Cognitive Conflict

• The concept of fraction equivalence is regarded as one of the most difficult topics in mathematical learning because of its abstract nature (Kong & Kwok, 2002). For example: 1⁄3, 2⁄6, 3⁄9, and 100⁄300 are all equivalent fractions.

• This research aims to design a collaborative learning environment for developing the concept of fraction equivalence in a mobile technology supported classroom.

3. Design of the Mobile Learning Environment for Collaborative Engagement

3.1 Mobile Technology Supported Classroom

• In this study a series of synchronous interactions in a mobile technology supported classroom is designed to encourage learners to engage in learning tasks, and a mobile platform is established for immediate interaction between learners in collaborative pairs.

• The pocket PC of teacher is pre-installed with the interface for managing the pair grouping and the organizing of learning activities.

• The pocket PC of learners is pre-installed with a graphical tool for learning fraction equivalence.

• The learners interact in pairs through a server that is connected to a SQL database.

• The server acts as a grouping coordinator of grouping requests from teachers and a communication coordinator of synchronous interactions between paired learners.

3.2 Pedagogical design for collaborative learning: Two situations for reflection

• To facilitate in-depth discussions among group members, learners are grouped into pairs with fellow classmates to conduct fraction equivalence comparison tasks.

• One learner is the designated question-setter, while the other is the question-replier. The learners alternate playing the two roles. There are three steps in this learning activity.

Step 1Step 1 is the process of question-setting.

- In this step, the learners in the role of question-setter set and send out questions about the equivalence of two fraction expressions.

- Once the learners are satisfied with the question set, they can click the “Confirm” button to send out the question to their partners through the server.

3.2 Pedagogical design for collaborative learning: Two situations for reflection

• Step 2Step 2 is the process of question-reply.

- In this step, the learners in the role of question-replier receive questions from their partners.

- After the learners have indicated their decisions, they click the “Confirm” button to send out their answers to the server.

• Step 3Step 3 is the process of judgment.

- In this step, the computer system plays the role of learning authority to assess the correctness.

- The computer system sends messages of “Correct” and “Incorrect” for the right and wrong questions or answers.

3.2 Pedagogical design for collaborative learning: Two situations for reflection

• There are two possible types of cognitive conflict that are engendered in the learning activity for the achievement of learning by reflection:

(1) One is triggered by the anomaly between the learning peers;

(2) the other is triggered by the anomaly between the learner and computer system.

• When one member of a pair of learners provides the correct question or answer, while another member gives the wrong question or answer, the computer system displays the message “Please Discuss” (see Figure 2a).

• This generates the first type of cognitive conflict – it invites learners to share understanding, and to engage in self-reflection and negotiation through collaborative interaction.

• When both members agree to finish their discussion, they have to click the “Discussion Finished” button (see Figure 2b) to inform the computer system.

• The computer system then generates the message “Correct” or “Incorrect” for the question-setter and question-replier (see Figure 3a & 3b).

• These authority judgments create the second type of cognitive conflict when they differ from the judgments of the learners.

• This offers learners a second opportunity to engage in self-reflection and to share understanding through a post-task discussion

4. Design for Resolution of Cognitive Conflicts

4.1 The status of groups of learners in learning the concept of fraction equivalence

• Case 1Case 1 is expected to occur commonly at the beginning of the learning process.

- In this case, both members of a group have a misconception about the equivalence of two fractions. The learners always set and reply to questions incorrectly.

Figure 4: The status of groups of learners in the process of learning the concept of fraction equivalence

Please discuss!

4. Design for Resolution of Cognitive Conflicts

• Case 2Case 2 and Case 3Case 3 occur when one of the group members begins to grasp the concept of fraction equivalence better than his or her partner.

- The learner who has developed the concept of fraction equivalence begins to set correct questions and make responses to questions with correct answers, while his or her counterpart cannot always achieve this status.

Figure 4: The status of groups of learners in the process of learning the concept of fraction equivalence

Please discuss!

4. Design for Resolution of Cognitive Conflicts

• Case 4Case 4 occurs when both learners in a group have a good understanding of the concept of fraction equivalence.

- The group members always set and reply to questions correctly.

- In this case, this is the learning goal of all of the groups.

Figure 4: The status of groups of learners in the process of learning the concept of fraction equivalence

4.2 Design for encouraging reciprocal tutoring

• The ultimate goal of this design is to help all of the groups of learners to attain learning status through the learning activities in the collaborative learning environment.

• In this collaborative learning environment, teachers play the role of mediator, rather than the authority on the judgment of correctness of equivalence of fractions.

• To realize this goal, two pedagogical tools are designed to encourage the reciprocal tutoring of learners:

(1) Re-grouping of group members;

(2) changing of the modes of question-setting.

• Teachers who observe groups that are working in learning status 1, can use the first pedagogical tool (Re-grouping) to swap a member from the group in learning status 1 with a member from a group in learning status 3.

• This helps to achieve more heterogeneous groups in the learning environment, which in turn helps to encourage prolific reciprocal tutoring.

• Teachers who detect groups that are working in learning status 2, can use the second pedagogical tool (change role) to designate another learner as the role question-setter by changing the mode of question-setting from “Turn-Taking” to ”Designation”.

• This creates an environment that allows the learners with better understanding to tutor learners who are still developing the concept.

5. Conclusion

• This study aims to design a collaborative learning environment for developing the concept of fraction equivalence in mobile technology-supported classroom settings.

• In this study learners are asked to group into pairs and to join in a synchronous learning activity with the use of pocket PCs in a wireless-networked classroom environment.

• The role of the teacher in the classroom in this design is to act as a facilitator to mediate and to promote the sharing of knowledge and learning authority by helping learners to form heterogeneous groups.

• Further work on large-scale studies in investigating whether learners recognize the anomalies and how they attempt to resolve the cognitive conflict will be attempted after the pilot case study.